ライフサイエンスコーパス: intraclass

1 The intraclass coefficient between 2 blinded operators was 0

2 Intraclass coefficient values for inter- and intraobserv

3 Interreader agreement was excellent (intraclass coefficient, 0.876).

4 rver agreement for vasculature measurements (intraclass coefficient, 0.94).

5 rs and volumes showed excellent correlation (intraclass coefficient, 0.95 and 0.94, respectively).

6 Intraclass coefficients for global and sectoral paramete

7 as were highly correlated between operators (intraclass correlation > 0.99, p < 0.001 for each) and w

8 99, p < 0.001 for each) and within operator (intraclass correlation > 0.99, p < 0.001 for each).

9 high intragrader and intergrader agreement (intraclass correlation >/=0.94).

10 The intraclass correlation (ICC) of both intragrader and int

11 ty in cell trajectories within droplets, the intraclass correlation (ICC), the synchronization surfac

12 arson correlation, analysis of variance, and intraclass correlation analyses were performed to compar

13 ination repeatability were assessed by using intraclass correlation and coefficient of variation anal

14 ons to predict mean pRNFLT measurements with intraclass correlation coeffecients ranged from 0.937 to

15 ility of scan assessment was generally good (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.7), and average t

16 l uptake measures at either uptake interval (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.97 and R(2) > 0.9

17 baseline and during therapy (R(2) >/= 0.94; intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.97).

18 baseline and during therapy (R(2) >/= 0.94; intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.97).

19 The HMS demonstrated excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.90, P < 0.001) and

20 producibility of measurements was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.947).

21 ealed a good Pearson's r (+0.974) but a poor intraclass correlation coefficient (+0.528) as the resul

22 arent fractions was low as determined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.61).

23 The intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence inter

24 morrhage volume (n=193): ABC/2 intraobserver intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.96-0.97, inte

25 ned for C-SAW-C [median kappa = 0.89; median intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.94], T-SAW-

26 cases and highly agreed between each other [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.98; 95% CI,

27 Analysis of variance, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis, and B

28 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altma

29 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient

30 grader repeatability were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient

31 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and linear regr

32 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) assessed with m

33 prediction robustness was evaluated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 31-50 extern

34 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between graders

35 -day test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between ICQ-S s

36 ) to provide an estimate of the value of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for dental cari

37 To estimate the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for estradiol a

38 The primary outcome for this study was the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the total o

39 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for these gradi

40 For each CpG site, we calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to compare vari

41 Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to ass

42 The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to ass

43 intervisit coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated

44 ty-five percent confidence intervals and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated

45 analysis of variance, two-sample t test, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used.

46 determined by the Cohen kappa statistic and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with correspond

47 ariation but large temporal variation [assay intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 79.3%-87.9%; t

48 percentage difference (PD), the absolute PD, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and coefficien

49 reader agreement were evaluated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and intersite

50 ty was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of

51 within-group similarity, represented by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), reduces precis

52 Using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the scale was

53 ty and repeatability were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

54 ed by the coefficient of variation (CoV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

55 lating the coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

56 ion (SW), coefficient of variation (CV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

57 Reproducibility was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

58 t was assessed with kappa statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

59 rver variability was analyzed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

60 (1.96xSw), coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

61 erobserver variability of FCT measurement by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

62 tal correlations; test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC); convergent val

63 Scoring agreement was evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC-r), concordance

64 y) for the ACQ was 0.74 at baseline, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (test-retest reliabil

65 , 0.87) and sacculations and abscesses ( ICC intraclass correlation coefficient , 0.84).

66 Interobserver agreement was excellent ( ICC intraclass correlation coefficient , 0.86-1).

67 gard to the severity of bronchiectasis ( ICC intraclass correlation coefficient , 0.87) and sacculati

68 ment was found in overall Bhalla score ( ICC intraclass correlation coefficient , 0.96) with regard t

69 l three speaking groups: healthy volunteers: intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.43 (95% CI, -0.18

70 een reviewers was between fair and moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.55, 95% confidenc

71 09 and 2007 demonstrated moderate agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.56; 95% CI: 0.22-

72 iety scores (P = .04), test-retest reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.57), specific to

73 is demonstrated a high level of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.77 for CAM items

74 ity of the modified Advocacy-Inquiry Scores (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.87) was excellent

75 +/- 404 kcal/d; TDEE2: 2465 +/- 408 kcal/d; intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.90) with a mean T

76 btained using IVCM at every follow-up stage (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.95 to 0.97 betwee

77 the "normalized" EZ reflectivity assessment (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.986, coefficient

78 erior when assessed by flow reversal method (intraclass correlation coefficient =0.931; P<0.001) over

79 Interrater reliability (reported as intraclass correlation coefficient [95% CI]) was good fo

80 ratio [OR] 1.21 [95% CI 0.71-2.08], p=0.489, intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.06 [95% CI 0.

81 ed on the macula for capillary nonperfusion (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.825 for the 3

82 nd 2DTagg highly agreed with sonomicrometry (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.89 and ICC,

83 time of 30 min after injection (R(2), 0.88; intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.93) and for

84 Intraclass correlation coefficient analysis showed highe

85 nd intraobserver agreement was quantified by intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman anal

86 servers, and reproducibility was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman anal

87 racture resistance was assessed by using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the coefficient o

88 The intraclass correlation coefficient for absolute agreemen

89 und for late enhancement (P < .001), and the intraclass correlation coefficient for ADCs was 0.788 (P

90 The intraclass correlation coefficient for BDEs 28, 47, 99,

91 Mean intraclass correlation coefficient for MUNIX intra-rater

92 The intraclass correlation coefficient for spherical equival

93 ion for internal consistency reliability and intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest relia

94 The overall intraclass correlation coefficient for the HOME device w

95 In study 1, the intervisit intraclass correlation coefficient for the lung clearanc

96 Interreader agreement was excellent, with an intraclass correlation coefficient greater than 0.75 for

97 Additionally, all measures had an intraclass correlation coefficient higher than 0.99.

98 ements of horizontal and vertical deviation (intraclass correlation coefficient horizontal 0.83, 95%

99 volume, ranging from 79 mL to 487 mL with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.23 (interquartil

100 laboratory hemoglobin differences showed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.47 within indivi

101 age features were defined on the basis of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.6 for a digital

102 ses corresponded in 87% of the cases with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.84 (95% confiden

103 our interval was supported by a total IH-QoL intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.84.

104 ator, with excellent reproducibility with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.903 (95% CI, 0.8

105 The ratio method demonstrated an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.969 for the temp

106 elded a coefficient of variation of 2.2% and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.97.

107 eader reproducibility was excellent, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.98 or higher for

108 2 graders showed excellent agreement with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.996 (95% CI, 0.9

109 ted ELISA resulting in excellent Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.998 and 0.983, r

110 T-CR total and subscale scores was observed (intraclass correlation coefficient range, 0.68-0.92).

111 t intraobserver and interobserver agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient range, 0.998 to 0.999

112 The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.96 to 0

113 The intraclass correlation coefficient revealed only poor to

114 nd intraclass correlation coefficients ( ICC intraclass correlation coefficient s).

115 in SNR in the remaining smokers improved the intraclass correlation coefficient to 0.82.

116 n as the random effect in the model and used intraclass correlation coefficient to assess the proport

117 < 0.001) were observed for all regions, and intraclass correlation coefficient values (test-retest c

118 Intraclass correlation coefficient values ranged between

119 The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.035.

120 CI 68.9-100.0, p=0.0045), and the calculated intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.035.

121 ement between the readers as measured by the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.4

122 The Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.986 (95% CI 0.9

123 Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to acc

124 The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to det

125 The intraclass correlation coefficient was greater than 0.8

126 The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess wi

127 The overall Cronbach alpha value and intraclass correlation coefficient were 0.90 and 0.92, r

128 ive and absolute test-retest variability and intraclass correlation coefficient were evaluated for th

129 The Wilcoxon test and the intraclass correlation coefficient were used to evaluate

130 t test, correlation analyses, and intraclass correlation coefficient were used to explore

131 For within-weeks reproducibility, the intraclass correlation coefficient with PDFF was higher

132 tability over the 7 days at each time point (intraclass correlation coefficient>.87).

133 bserver, and interimage variability (1 minus intraclass correlation coefficient) and agreement (Bland

134 Interobserver agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient) for ARI index was 0.

135 ed the level of agreement between reviewers (intraclass correlation coefficient).

136 90, K(trans), and maximum slope enhancement (intraclass correlation coefficient, >0.9).

137 howed somewhat better agreement with RT-PCR (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.57 and 0.70 for mi

138 and postoperative RTE values of unaffected (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.572) and affected

139 plaque presence and from good to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.69-0.99) for quant

140 es corresponded best with pathology volumes (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.72; P < .001).

141 Within-family correlation for QAT burden (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.73 in NF1-affected

142 US imaging techniques was good to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.73-0.86).

143 36 of 49 prespecified items (median [range] intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.76 [0.53-.96]).

144 ity was excellent for CSAMI Activity scores (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.66-0

145 ely, with excellent interobserver agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.83).

146 orrelation coefficient, 0.572) and affected (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.830) segments.

147 elation coefficient, 0.97; intraexperimenter intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.90), and yielded r

148 r agreement was good for bone morphometrics (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.906-0.976), and mo

149 and adenosine-induced coronary flow reserve (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.922; P<0.001).

150 bility (coefficient of variation, 0.8%-5.2%; intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.93-0.98) in all pa

151 igher with MR elastography than with biopsy (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.95 vs 0.89).

152 ed the most accurate K1 values (R(2) = 0.94; intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.96).

153 nonenhanced thick CT images were very good (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.963 and 0.899, res

154 oroidal segmentation software was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.97-0.99).

155 anced CT was reproducible (interexperimenter intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.97; intraexperimen

156 observer luminal measurements were reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.98; 95% confidence

157 very were well correlated with infused dose (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.98; P < .001).

158 ders in measured tumor iodine concentration (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.9990 [95% confiden

159 ed times wearing glasses in adults was high (intraclass correlation coefficient, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.999-

160 and Morisita's overlap index, as well as the intraclass correlation coefficient, and performed fold c

161 The coefficient of variation, intraclass correlation coefficient, and pooled standard

162 sulting in excellent Pearson correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient, both being 0.99 for

163 eliability was determined by using a two-way intraclass correlation coefficient, qualitative scores w

164 ing reliability was assessed in terms of the intraclass correlation coefficient, which indicates the

165 en attending radiologists was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient.

166 racteristics was analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient.

167 nal repeatability of Pao2 measurements as an intraclass correlation coefficient.

168 calculating the coefficient of variation and intraclass correlation coefficient.

169 tween the 2 methods was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

170 robserver agreement was assessed by using an intraclass correlation coefficient.

171 erreader agreement was assessed by using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

172 Agreement was quantified as the intraclass correlation coefficient.

173 and interobserver agreement was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient.

174 Interreader agreement was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: CSR chemical-shift r

175 pha=0.81 vs. 0.88); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.66 vs. 0.61); conve

176 ed in one study, and results were very good (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.81).

177 ra- and interobserver agreement according to intraclass correlation coefficients >0.90 for all parame

178 cores were assessed with the chi(2) test and intraclass correlation coefficients ( ICC intraclass cor

179 Intraobserver, intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence inte

180 Reliability was evaluated by using intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence inte

181 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altm

182 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and mixed effe

183 Variability was assessed as intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

184 nnaire was excellent (Cronbach's alpha=0.96; intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC)=0.977 (0.951 t

185 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Alt

186 raobserver reproducibility were described by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and coefficie

187 d reproducibility among serial samples using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Spearman

188 For each pesticide, we computed intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the estim

189 Reproducibility was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and within-su

190 We used linear mixed models to calculate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) as a measure

191 Evaluation of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between antib

192 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between sampl

193 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) demonstrated

194 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for total, co

195 We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of biomarkers

196 or maternal and child samples, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to assess tri

197 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculat

198 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculat

199 Associations with melanoma and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were evaluate

200 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to

201 In addition, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to

202 Two-way single-measure intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to

203 Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to

204 rence (Delta) +/-95% limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% CIs.

205 Reliabilities were reported as pooled intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% conf

206 We used linear mixed models to calculate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), a measure of

207 kappa Values, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Al

208 analysis was performed by using the t test, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Spearman

209 ity between two examinations was tested with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and their as

210 ducibility between readers was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

211 ltman plots, repeatability coefficients, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

212 ween right and left eyes were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

213 and snack frequencies was assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

214 inimum, and minimum hour) was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

215 Interscan repeatability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

216 mparisons were made for each method by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

217 high intrarater and inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients 0.98 and 0.97, respe

218 ng PCOS to assess reproducibility (kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs]).

219 pRNFLT of the second group was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plo

220 d with the Wilcoxon rank test by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients and by using Pearson

221 Intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of

222 Interreader agreement was assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients and kappa statistics

223 Interreader agreement was analyzed with intraclass correlation coefficients and kappa statistics

224 ission rates across diagnosis and calculated intraclass correlation coefficients and median odds rati

225 Intraclass correlation coefficients and the Wilcoxon sig

226 th their long-term averages and to calculate intraclass correlation coefficients for each parameter.

227 The intraclass correlation coefficients for observed-to-expe

228 The interrater and intrarater intraclass correlation coefficients for scale were consi

229 reliability was good for most measures, with intraclass correlation coefficients generally greater th

230 level functional phenotype is reliable (with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.59-0.73), indep

231 o strongly reliable over 5 consecutive days (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.81 and 0.51, re

232 for total energy expenditure (TEE) and AEE (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.84 and 0.73, re

233 he PDAI, followed by the ABSIS and the PVAS (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.98 [95% CI, 0.9

234 was observed at the neighborhood level, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 6% for telomere l

235 Intraclass correlation coefficients of agreements for 3-

236 lated between separate imaging sessions with intraclass correlation coefficients of over 0.85 for all

237 Throughout the sessions, intraclass correlation coefficients of the CLS acrophase

238 Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.61 for

239 l measurements were highly reproducible with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.82 to

240 e (mean differences 0.1-4.2 points), and the intraclass correlation coefficients showed good agreemen

241 Intra- and interexamination intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.996-0.998 and

242 Additionally, intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated betw

243 Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated for

244 The intraclass correlation coefficients were excellent, from

245 MR imaging PDFF, intra- and interexamination intraclass correlation coefficients were greater than or

246 Wilcoxon signed rank test and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess

247 The intraclass correlation coefficients were, for OCT, 0.99

248 a coefficient and test-retest), reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients), sensitivity, and a

249 nt and intrapatient variability was similar (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.40-0.59) for all

250 amometry was comparable between two studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.62-0.96).

251 s found to be very good in all four studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.86-0.99 or Pearso

252 ip dynamometry was very good in two studies (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.89-0.97).

253 re assessed with linear regression analyses, intraclass correlation coefficients, and coefficients of

254 served values and temporal variability using intraclass correlation coefficients, and performed surro

255 Repeatability was determined with intraclass correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots,

256 trophysiologic evaluation were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients, the Mann Whitney U

257 gional reproducibility was assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients, which were 0.67 and

258 percentage agreement, kappa statistics, and intraclass correlation coefficients.

259 s assessed by kappa coefficients (kappa) and intraclass correlation coefficients.

260 intrarater reliability was assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients.

261 eement was calculated with weighted kappa or intraclass correlation coefficients.

262 een right and left eyes were assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficients.

263 Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients.

264 A high intraclass correlation for the VES (intraclass correlati

265 th test-retest variability less than 10% and intraclass correlation greater than 0.9.

266 x and hospital structural differences, model intraclass correlation indicated that 21% of the observe

267 of probands compared with siblings, with an intraclass correlation of 0.40 (P = .07).

268 %-2% for all) and FA (5%), as well as a high intraclass correlation of 0.92-0.98.

269 The intraclass correlation of each dimension was greater tha

270 ral stability of the rankings, we calculated intraclass correlation of the annual coverage values.

271 ed-model analysis to measure effect size and intraclass correlation to determine the influence of fam

272 kings exhibited high temporal stability with intraclass correlation values of 0.88 (95% confidence in

273 A high intraclass correlation for the VES (intraclass correlation VES: 0.923 vs. Vitiligo Area Scor

274 xcellent interrater reliability for the VES (intraclass correlation VES: 0.924 vs. Vitiligo Area Scor

275 The median (interquartile range) test-retest intraclass correlation was 0.69 (0.57-0.79) and 0.76 (0.

276 Intraclass correlation was used to compare diameters and

277 Intraclass correlation with histologic results was 0.57

278 ted to articulate (odds ratio) and quantify (intraclass correlation) interphysician variation.

279 Interassessor reliability (kappa, intraclass correlation), internal consistency (Cronbach

280 ly reproducible in patients with stable CAD (intraclass correlation, >/=0.78) and exhibited excellent

281 SD-OCT measures had high intereye agreement (intraclass correlation, 0.83-0.93) and high intragrader

282 Excellent test-retest (intraclass correlation, 0.89-0.99 across studies and fol

283 eatable and reproducible for all parameters (intraclass correlation, 0.925 to 1.000).

284 ross studies and follow-up) and inter-rater (intraclass correlation, 0.97) reliability were found.

285 nt of interphysician variation was moderate (intraclass correlation, 22%), whereas the variation betw

286 cialties and primary care practices was low (intraclass correlation, 5%).

287 ctivity measures, Spearman rank correlation, intraclass correlation, and gray matter volumes.

288 Interstudy repeatability was assessed with intraclass correlation.

289 atine showed a modest degree of familiality (intraclass correlation=0.36).

290 ity measurements remained temporally stable (intraclass correlation=0.81).

291 The intraclass correlations (ICC) of this technique compared

292 Intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to test for inh

293 onse during reward anticipation, analysis of intraclass correlations of functional contrasts, and ass

294 and LupusQoL were significant; relative good intraclass correlations or kappa coefficients indicated

295 Inter-rater agreement, measured using intraclass correlations, was 0.91 (SE = 0.09) across sta

296 tion of a member of the same class, that is, intraclass discrimination, was 100% as determined by use

297 o report adequately precise estimates of the intraclass kappa.

298 Intraclass median SNV differences ranged from 23 to 245.

299 mplexity of the natural scenes and the large intraclass variability of the face stimuli used, suggest

300 and the extent of interclass differences and intraclass variance was found to allow the identificatio